World Cities Day and the Question of Urban Futures in Srinagar

Every year, the world observes World Cities Day on October 31, marking the close of Urban October—an initiative by the United Nations to promote sustainable urbanization. The global theme, “Better City, Better Life,” urges cities to be inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable, in line with Sustainable Development Goal 11.

This year’s observance coincided with two major infrastructure announcements for Srinagar. The first was the ₹700-crore, 7-kilometre flyover connecting Lal Chowk to Parimpora, approved under the Union Ministry of Road Transport and Highways’ 2025–26 plan. The second was a Memorandum of Understanding between the Inland Waterways Authority of India (IWAI) and the Government of Jammu and Kashmir to develop an Urban Water Transport System on Dal Lake and the River Jhelum on Kochi Water Metro lines.

At first glance, these projects may appear as symbols of progress—modern infrastructure promising better connectivity and new avenues for tourism. Yet, beneath this optimism lie deeper questions about how Srinagar is being planned, governed, and imagined.

Whose City?

The Dalgate–Parimpora elevated corridor does not feature in Srinagar’s Comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP) or Master Plans—the very instruments meant to guide spatial growth and infrastructure priorities. While the proposed grade separator at Parimpora is justified in both plans, the extended 7-km elevated corridor could severely compromise the east–west and north–south mass rapid transit corridors identified in the CMP and the Alternatives Analysis Report for the Srinagar MRTS.

By contrast, the Integrated Water Transport System is included in the Master Plan 2035, Comprehensive Mobility Plan 2020, and the Integrated Public Transport Study by the Srinagar Smart City Limited (SSCL). However, its implementation demands careful consideration of the current ecological condition of the Jhelum and Dal Lake.

The sudden announcement of both projects—without public consultation or transparent technical justification—raises concerns about accountability and public participation. Large-scale urban projects are not mere engineering feats; they are spatial decisions that shape collective life. When conceived outside statutory frameworks, they risk turning the city into a site of governance without consent—where infrastructure replaces planning and citizens become spectators in their own urban transformation.

The irony is stark: on a day dedicated to celebrating participatory and resilient cities, Srinagar witnessed decisions made without its citizens.

Ignoring a Living Heritage

Srinagar is not a tabula rasa for experimentation. It is one of South Asia’s oldest continuously inhabited cities, shaped by a deep hydrological and cultural heritage. Its bridges, ghats, and waterfront neighbourhoods evolved in response to the Jhelum River, reflecting an intimate adaptation to its fluvial setting.

This historic relationship between land, water, and settlement once ensured resilience. Yet, successive interventions—often externally driven—have sidelined local ecological knowledge and traditional wisdom. The treatment of Dal Lake dwellers as encroachers, rather than as integral to the ecosystem, has led to social displacement and ecological decline. When planning disregards such embedded wisdom, it produces not development, but dissonance.

The Cost of Disconnect

While the proposed flyover promises to reduce congestion, it may reinforce the very problems it aims to solve. Elevated corridors often improve travel times for a few but erode the pedestrian, cultural, and visual fabric of the city. The long construction phase will inevitably bring dust, diversions, and disruption to local businesses.

Similarly, the urban water transport project, though conceptually appealing, faces major ecological and operational hurdles. The Dal and Jhelum are burdened by siltation, pollution, and fluctuating water levels. Introducing motorized transport without a parallel restoration strategy could further degrade these fragile systems.

Both projects seem guided more by spectacle than substance, privileging visibility over sustainability and resilience.

Restoration, not expansion

Srinagar now stands at a crossroads. It can continue pursuing fragmented, high-visibility projects or embrace a restorative planning model grounded in ecology, heritage, and public trust.

The city’s resilience depends on reclaiming its natural infrastructure—the wetlands of Hokersar and Narkara, the Karewas, and the Jhelum floodplain. This calls for shifting from land-use zoning to watershed-based planning, ensuring that every intervention enhances rather than undermines the basin’s ecological balance.

Instead of another flyover, Srinagar needs better-managed public transport, walkable streets, and intelligent traffic systems. Instead of symbolic water transport, it needs lake restoration, pollution control, and inclusive waterfront renewal.

A Metropolitan Urban Observatory, integrating GIS, satellite analytics, AI, and citizen feedback, could help align agencies, monitor land-use changes, and ensure accountability. Emerging digital tools can support this transition—but only if guided by a locally grounded, participatory planning vision.

The way forward

Srinagar’s best future will not be measured by how much concrete it pours but by how wisely it restores balance between ecology, economy, and equity. The city must remain a city of rivers, gardens, and shared spaces—a Himalayan settlement that lives with its landscape, not against it.

On this World Cities Day, Srinagar must confront a crucial question: Who is the city being built for—and at what cost?

A resilient future will begin only when planning learns again to listen—to its geography, its people, and its history. Better City, Better Life—only when the city learns to flow again with its river.

The author is an urban and transport planner with over three decades of experience in regional and metropolitan planning, including major projects in Jammu and Kashmir.